A review of patient and carer participation and the use of qualitative research in the development of core outcome sets

被引:31
|
作者
Jones, Janet E. [1 ]
Jones, Laura L. [1 ]
Keeley, Thomas J. H. [2 ]
Calvert, Melanie J. [1 ]
Mathers, Jonathan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Coll Med & Dent Sci, Inst Appl Hlth Res, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[2] Parexel Int, Evergreen Bldg, London, England
来源
PLOS ONE | 2017年 / 12卷 / 03期
关键词
CLINICAL-TRIALS; CONSENSUS STATEMENT; HAND OSTEOARTHRITIS; HEALTH OUTCOMES; ATOPIC ECZEMA; DOMAINS; PERSPECTIVE; FIBROMYALGIA; CHILDREN; BENEFITS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0172937
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background To be meaningful, a core outcome set (COS) should be relevant to all stakeholders including patients and carers. This review aimed to explore the methods by which patients and carers have been included as participants in COS development exercises and, in particular, the use and reporting of qualitative methods. Methods In August 2015, a search of the Core Outcomes Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database was undertaken to identify papers involving patients and carers in COS develop-ment. Data were extracted to identify the data collection methods used in COS development, the number of health professionals, patients and carers participating in these, and the reported details of qualitative research undertaken. Results Fifty-nine papers reporting patient and carer participation were included in the review, ten of which reported using qualitative methods. Although patients and carers participated in out-come elicitation for inclusion in COS processes, health professionals tended to dominate the prioritisation exercises. Of the ten qualitative papers, only three were reported as a clear pre-designed part of a COS process. Qualitative data were collected using interviews, focus groups or a combination of these. None of the qualitative papers reported an underpinning methodological framework and details regarding data saturation, reflexivity and resource use associated with data collection were often poorly reported. Five papers reported difficulty in achieving a diverse sample of participants and two reported that a large and varied range of outcomes were often identified by participants making subsequent rating and rank-ing difficult. Conclusions Consideration of the best way to include patients and carers throughout the COS develop-ment process is needed. Additionally, further work is required to assess the potential role of qualitative methods in COS, to explore the knowledge produced by different qualitative data collection methods, and to evaluate the time and resources required to incorporate qualitative methods into COS development.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A systematic review of studies reporting the development of core outcome sets for use in routine care
    Kearney, Anna
    Gargon, Elizabeth
    Mitchell, James W.
    Callaghan, Stephen
    Yameen, Farheen
    Williamson, Paula R.
    Dodd, Susanna
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 158 : 34 - 43
  • [2] The use of qualitative methods to inform Delphi surveys in core outcome set development
    Keeley, T.
    Williamson, P.
    Callery, P.
    Jones, L. L.
    Mathers, J.
    Jones, J.
    Young, B.
    Calvert, M.
    TRIALS, 2016, 17
  • [3] Pediatric core outcome sets had deficiencies and lacked child and family input: A methodological review
    Goren, Katherine
    Monsour, Andrea
    Stallwood, Emma
    Offringa, Martin
    Butcher, Nancy J.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 155 : 13 - 21
  • [4] Synthesizing Core Outcome Sets for outcomes research in cohort studies: a systematic review
    Musgrove, Erica
    Gasparini, Loretta
    McBain, Katie
    Clifford, Susan A.
    Carter, Simon A.
    Teede, Helena
    Wake, Melissa
    PEDIATRIC RESEARCH, 2022, 92 (04) : 936 - 945
  • [5] A review of core outcome sets (COS) developed for different settings finds there is a subset of outcomes relevant for both research and routine care
    Kearney, Anna
    Williamson, Paula R.
    Dodd, Susanna
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2024, 173
  • [6] Core outcome sets for research and clinical practice
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    Ostelo, Raymond W.
    Turk, Dennis C.
    Buchbinder, Rachelle
    Boers, Maarten
    BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2017, 21 (02) : 77 - 84
  • [7] CORE OUTCOME SETS AND DENTAL PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES
    Lamont, Thomas J.
    Clarkson, Jan E.
    JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [8] Identifying common core outcome domains from core outcome sets of musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review
    Sabet, Tamer S.
    Anderson, David B.
    Stubbs, Peter W.
    Buchbinder, Rachelle
    Terwee, Caroline B.
    Chiarotto, Alessandro
    Gagnier, Joel
    Verhagen, Arianne P.
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2022, 11 (01)
  • [9] Core outcome sets in cancer and their approaches to identifying and selecting patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review
    Ramsey, Imogen
    Eckert, Marion
    Hutchinson, Amanda D.
    Marker, Julie
    Corsini, Nadia
    JOURNAL OF PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES, 2020, 4 (01)
  • [10] Progress on core outcome sets for critical care research
    Blackwood, Bronagh
    Marshall, John
    Rose, Louise
    CURRENT OPINION IN CRITICAL CARE, 2015, 21 (05) : 439 - 444